Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins
Actually the noise in rasmussen's numbers are very low, which is a desirable quality for polling. There was a study some years ago after one of the major elections that showed rasmussen's tracking numbers had the lowest standard deviations of anyone else's. This means it is LESS subject to noise than his competition, which probably means he is controlling better for sources of error than the rest.

The source of error rasmussen is particularly good at controlling is "party id". Although there have been endless discussions on FR about whether or not party id should be a controlled figure in polling, I think the way rasmussen does it has basically been proven to be highly accurate. What he does is, he polls for "party id" over long periods of time and uses an average over a huge amount of data. That means his party id figures are reasonably stable, but they do respond to demographic changes over time in a pretty accurate way.

Other pollsters either do not control for party id, meaning they frequently oversample democrats or republicans leading to more error, or they correct for party id using old figures from the prior major election which may not be accurate anymore.

To see how important party id is in controlling error, realize that democrats rate obama's performance positively at a rate of 77 to over 80% in recent polls, while republicans rate him favorably in the single digits. If you oversample one or the other group even by tiny amounts it nearly adds error at a 1 to 1 ratio to the oversampling.

Time and again Ras has been proven the most accurate. No polling is perfect, but there is good evidence that the way Ras does it is among the best available.

52 posted on 07/31/2010 7:28:58 AM PDT by drangundsturm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: drangundsturm

Excellent points - I have to laugh when I see the so called big names in lame stream / cable media (like chuck todd) opining in tweets that Ras. polling is “too unreliable” and that he is waiting for “more accurate polling”...?


58 posted on 07/31/2010 7:35:19 AM PDT by VRWCTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: drangundsturm

Honestly, I meant to say “decreases noise.” Sometimes I read what I’ve written later and I wonder where my mind, my spelling skills, or my grammar book were at the time I wrote. Sometimes I see the mistakes immediately....right after I hit the “post” button.


60 posted on 07/31/2010 7:36:04 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it. Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: drangundsturm
scott rasmussen admitted on Hannity’s show that he has changed his polling system this year. Nothing in the past can point to his accuracy today... Brown vs Coakely is a prime example.

LLS

109 posted on 07/31/2010 9:35:54 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer ( WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson